Sacramento Bee posts both Qik, digital recorder videos of Olympic torch bearers

From Bhaskar Roy’s excellent corporate weblog for Qik (the company he co-founded), I see that The Sacramento Bee has been using Qik to post camera phone videos to its Web site as well as traditional camcorder videos, based on an article in journalism.co.uk.

The newspaper used Qik to record the Olympic torch bearers in San Francisco, including the pro-Tibet/anti-China protesters (see below).

The videos on Qik (such as one below) may be embedded in other Web sites and weblogs, as is common with video sharing sites.  However, videos on The Sacramento Bee’s own video site, may not be embedded.  (At least, I don’t see a URL for embedding.)

I hope this is just a technological “problem,” but I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s the result of the newspaper’s specific decision.  It doesn’t make sense not to allow embedding because it certainly provides publicity for The Bee, which isn’t particularly well known (at least outside of California and journalism circles).

<em>Bee</em>’s ramifications 

There are at least two extremely interesting aspects of the “Bee’s” actions: 

1.  The reporter attached his camera phone to his digital video recorder so he could shoot both the Qik streams quickly (no pun intended!) for posting videos and higher quality videos for posting afterwards.

2.  The Sacramento Bee is a newspaper that’s enhancing its Web site’s value with videos.  As a former full time journalist who does some freelance writing as well as being a full time wireless data consultant, I analyze how camera phones are helping to revolutionize the journalism business. 

The future of journalism is the “multimedia reporter” who will have to write the news, speak the news (with podcasts) and shoot the news (with videos).

Qik versus TV cameras

Non-video-oriented news organizations — newspapers, magazines, newsletters, radio stations — have to look at their businesses as “news,” which is not restricted to the way it’s presented.  Journalism.co.uk writes that The Sacramento Bee’s “reporters were able broadcast moving images as events unfolded — effectively replicating a live TV news service at a fraction of the cost and with the flexibility to move.”

Well, there is a difference in the quality of streaming cellular videos and using the resources of a television station.  There’s a reason TV stations purchase camera lenses for thousands of dollars (sometimes more than $10,000) and employ a “sound man” to ensure the audio is a good as possible. 

However, many print and radio news companies already are redesigning and revitalizing their methods to offer podcasts and videos, although shrinking profits is making the process extremely difficult.  (Update (4/20/08):  To learn about a national radio network that’s using videos, check out my PodCampDC article in my “Wireless Muse” weblog.)

Revolutionary, for cellular operators, too

I’ve been writing — and will continue to write — about the revolutionary aspects of live cellular video streaming.  And, it’s not just for news organizations.  The ramifications for society — with anyone being able to stream live videos — are significant.

Live cellular video streaming also will be a huge boon to cellular operators.  It will spark sales of flat monthly rate plans for unlimited use as consumers and businesses find new ways to take advantage of the technology.  However, the operators are leery of live streaming.

One reason is they would prefer subscribers purchase unlimited-use plans, and then not use them much!  The operators don’t want to invest in more cellular towers and backhaul infrastructure to accommodate dramatic increases in data usage — and many people streaming lots of videos certainly can increase data transmissions.

Another reason operators are leery is because they haven’t figured out (at least in the United States) how to make gobs of money from live streaming video.  As a result, they aren’t promoting it.  And, the operators do an absolutely awful job of educating subscribers about the many applications they offer, once consumers are roped into two-year contracts.

Good news

The good news, though, is regardless of the operators’ lethargy, cellular users — both kids and, increasingly, news organizations — are beginning to “get” this new technology.

Comments

[Satya]

Really good article. I have been following your blog for last 3 months. You have good knowledge
on Mobile(cell phone) Industry and happenings. Please continue the good work. Thank you.

[Alan A. Reiter]

Hi Gary,

Thanks very much for the update. It's interesting that you think at least two TV stations used cellular to broadcast the event.

As I've written several times previously, I think ** all ** journalists -- print, radio and TV -- should be given high-end camera phones for capturing photos and videos.

[Gary Allen]

All four network TV stations in San Francisco covered the torch run live when it made its protested appearance in the city--for over three hours! You'll recall that the route was secretly changed, leaving their extensive network of fixed cameras useless. So all four stations relied on helicopter coverage until they could hastily move a few of their ENG trucks to the last hundred yards of the run. To fill in coverage, at least two of the stations interspersed live video from what I believe were cellular handsets, probably coming through Qik.com. It certainly wasn't even SD quality, but given the nature of the moving event and excited crowds, it gave a great perspective of the event.